Answer to the Letter to the Editor of Jianqiang Ni et al. concerning "ALIF and total disc replacement versus 2-level circumferential fusion with TLIF: a prospective, randomized, clinical and radiological trial" by Hoff EK, Strube P, Pumberger M, et al. (2015) Eur Spine J. doi:10.1007/s00586-015-3852-y.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

1. Operative Management of Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease.Asian spine journal · 2016
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Letter to the Editor concerning "ALIF and total disc replacement versus 2-level circumferential fusion with TLIF: a prospective, randomized, clinical and radiological trial" by Hoff EK, Strube P, Pumberger M et al. (2015). Eur Spine J. Mar 7. [Epub ahead of print].2015

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.